Bespoke Cutter And Tailor

Hi there! Im new in both tailoring (Ive started studying for like 3 months now) and in this thread, and I've been particularly interested in fitting and alterations, since I believe its highly important (It really makes bespoke actually "Bespoke") and its something that I can exercise without necessarily having a client and that jacket, although its highly recommended that I do, and I have been doing some alterations on my own jackets.
Anyways, I did two "Virtual Fittings" if you will, with images that people sent not so long ago in another forum, and I detailed the causes and fixes of the problems which I could detail. Basically I need help actually "Correcting" these fittings If needed, so that I can also learn everything there Is to learn! Ill attach the images down below.

Quote from: Gerry on October 31, 2024, 08:59:12 PM

Quote from: Bifurcator on October 31, 2024, 11:54:35 AMThis is what it looks like in garment form and when I push that curve of the wearer's left side to meet the line on the wearer's right side it buckles, but to your point it doesn't necessarily need to lay completely flat.  I am getting a little bit of an issue with the facing "rippling"/ buckling at the edge.  But I think a lot of this is just coming down to practice at this point.

If you place the back of your hand underneath the cloth where the rippling is, it will probably disappear; though the edges don't look pressed, so some of that distortion may be tension from the seams having been turned back. The seam edges at the curve are mostly on the bias, so the cloth should naturally stretch how it needs to with only a light press over a ham.

Either way, stop making judgements when laying things flat! You can't properly evaluate what's going on because you're buckling cloth out of shape: it wants to curve in a 3-D way (that's what we've designed for in the draft). Play around with the paper mock-up that I demonstrated and things will become a lot clearer in your mind (I can tell that you still haven't quite got it). The fronts don't oppose one another when curved, and when the crotch seams are joined and facing backwards. Everything complements each other.

Despite giving you an alternative method, you're continuing to pin in a way that creates buckling; which isn't helping, is it. I'd recommend basting instead; and baste over a ham or similar, so that there's some curvature to the fronts. That way you're securing the required shape with the baste stitches. You're also securing the required lengths, which I think is what Greger and Hendrick were talking about. If you think of arcs drawn from the same point, the outer arc (the LHS, which overlaps) is going to have more length than the inner one (the RHS, which underlaps).

Best that the aforementioned forum-members confirm that, though. It's not something I'd thought about before ... which is why I come here: I always learn new things!

Yes, basting is best, it leaves the most movement to the cloth and shows bigger problems earlier. I have built far more womens' than mens' trousers but here's my approach. I like to make womens'trousers with a bit of nonchalance. But women hate front crotches with a "grin" so to speak. I project the shorter curvature of the front as a part circle and project a radius from where any unwanted bulging or waving sits. Correcting it by pinning, then opening the parts the curve changes notably. I like to do first toiles without fly (closed in the back) and cleaning out the front to get perfect "flat fronted" pants. I know this is more dress making technique than tailoring but it works for me.

Cheers, Hendrick 

Quote from: Bifurcator on October 31, 2024, 12:10:50 PM

Quote from: Hendrick on October 30, 2024, 05:54:03 AM

Quote from: Greger on October 29, 2024, 06:33:57 PMHosteck and I were talking about one fly is a little straighter than the other (it might be in his book). Forgot which side. A book I was reading said to shrink one side a little bit. It said Never Stretch. Gerry is saying stretch the seam allowance, which is a different subject. So, One side of the seam is shrunk and the other side (seam allowance) is stretched. Some of the pressing maybe best pressed over a ham, mit, or sleeve roll.

I was tought that the underpart should be 3mm shorter than the upper fly and that the weight and bulk of the material is in play as well.

Cheers, Hendrick

The underpart being the right side of the garment and corresponding fly shield?  Just 3mm taken off the top?
thanks

The other way of thinking about it, and I don't remember which, when it is on the left side it forces a slight curve, plus it has more to go over, being on the outside. The force part forces the outer edge to bulge out, which is desirable.
It was 20-30 years ago when I visited him twice. He lived about a 100 miles away. He brought up the subject, which I was still thinking about. I was asking if he had a booklet about fitting trousers. Sadly he didn't. His advice for fitting coats is very good in his coat book.

Some cloths have an inside and outside, and others have an up and down (nap and/or set). Then there is, did you order enough cloth. Or, however you can use the scraps. There might be a best way. But otherwise, whatever method is available.
The cuff and gauntlets shown are mostly decoration. You can make real working functioning ones with real buttons and buttonholes. And slip a pocket in, too.

Quote from: Bifurcator on October 31, 2024, 11:54:35 AMThis is what it looks like in garment form and when I push that curve of the wearer's left side to meet the line on the wearer's right side it buckles, but to your point it doesn't necessarily need to lay completely flat.  I am getting a little bit of an issue with the facing "rippling"/ buckling at the edge.  But I think a lot of this is just coming down to practice at this point.

If you place the back of your hand underneath the cloth where the rippling is, it will probably disappear; though the edges don't look pressed, so some of that distortion may be tension from the seams having been turned back. The seam edges at the curve are mostly on the bias, so the cloth should naturally stretch how it needs to with only a light press over a ham.

Either way, stop making judgements when laying things flat! You can't properly evaluate what's going on because you're buckling cloth out of shape: it wants to curve in a 3-D way (that's what we've designed for in the draft). Play around with the paper mock-up that I demonstrated and things will become a lot clearer in your mind (I can tell that you still haven't quite got it). The fronts don't oppose one another when curved, and when the crotch seams are joined and facing backwards. Everything complements each other.

Despite giving you an alternative method, you're continuing to pin in a way that creates buckling; which isn't helping, is it. I'd recommend basting instead; and baste over a ham or similar, so that there's some curvature to the fronts. That way you're securing the required shape with the baste stitches. You're also securing the required lengths, which I think is what Greger and Hendrick were talking about. If you think of arcs drawn from the same point, the outer arc (the LHS, which overlaps) is going to have more length than the inner one (the RHS, which underlaps).

Best that the aforementioned forum-members confirm that, though. It's not something I'd thought about before ... which is why I come here: I always learn new things!

Quote from: Hendrick on October 30, 2024, 05:54:03 AM

Quote from: Greger on October 29, 2024, 06:33:57 PMHosteck and I were talking about one fly is a little straighter than the other (it might be in his book). Forgot which side. A book I was reading said to shrink one side a little bit. It said Never Stretch. Gerry is saying stretch the seam allowance, which is a different subject. So, One side of the seam is shrunk and the other side (seam allowance) is stretched. Some of the pressing maybe best pressed over a ham, mit, or sleeve roll.

I was tought that the underpart should be 3mm shorter than the upper fly and that the weight and bulk of the material is in play as well.

Cheers, Hendrick

The underpart being the right side of the garment and corresponding fly shield?  Just 3mm taken off the top?
thanks

Quote from: Greger on October 29, 2024, 06:33:57 PMHosteck and I were talking about one fly is a little straighter than the other (it might be in his book). Forgot which side. A book I was reading said to shrink one side a little bit. It said Never Stretch. Gerry is saying stretch the seam allowance, which is a different subject. So, One side of the seam is shrunk and the other side (seam allowance) is stretched. Some of the pressing maybe best pressed over a ham, mit, or sleeve roll.

I don't remember reading that in Hosteck's book, but I didn't read from front to back, just jumped around to the constructions I wanted to try, I also don't retain much...haha...so quite possibly I did read it and just forgot.  If you look at the image I posted above it would seam to make sense to make the left side straighter, reducing the concave shape. I may give it a try.  If it's minimal I can see it hurting the fit of the garment especially if the underside still retains it's curve.
I'm not sure which side I would shrink. 
I do remember Hosteck mentions cutting the facings a little more hollow than the garment at front curve.  I think this would give it a little more room or hollowness in that area.  I believe he refers to it as "spring", but I could be mixing that up.

Quote from: Gerry on October 29, 2024, 06:07:35 PMBifurcator, you're still thinking two-dimensionally and the body isn't a flat surface, is it. Furthermore, your mock-up doesn't reflect the reality of what happens when the two sides are overlapped (you're trying to join them like a seam, which isn't the end result).

I've done the following by eye, so it's not to scale or exact: the shape is generally curved like the front but I've deliberately exaggerated the overlap to prove that it isn't problematic. Firstly, fold over your seam allowances to the wrong side as can be seen here:



Note that I've had to tear the paper in order to do this. It replicates the stretching required by the iron in order to release the tension along the outer edge. Also note that the two sides are only joined at the base of the crotch curve; and that the upper parts overlap as they wish to fall (hopefully as we've designed for). In this example, I added 'underlap' to the right hand side of the pattern, graduating it into the original crotch curve as demonstrated earlier. Not very accurately done, but hopefully you can see that it's a continuous seam (albeit one with cuts along it - the limitations of paper), rather than the Poulin example which abruptly cuts the underlap short. The right side slips under the left side - they're not sewn together as a seam, are they.

Now see things from the front:



Note how everything curves nicely if you're not trying to push it against a flat surface. Starting the crotch curve higher deemphasises the crotch by allowing a little more ease over the front. It looks more natural with higher rise/traditional trousers.

Yes, good point about thinking in 2-D and wanting the garment/fabric to lay flat while sewing and after.  I definitely want a garment with shape, in the right places. Figuring out how to control that shape and where it lays is a never ending learning curve

To be fair, I understand it should overlap not connect like a seam.  I think my photo/pattern mock-up was a little misleading.  This is what it looks like in garment form and when I push that curve of the wearer's left side to meet the line on the wearer's right side it buckles, but to your point it doesn't necessarily need to lay completely flat.  I am getting a little bit of an issue with the facing "rippling"/ buckling at the edge.  But I think a lot of this is just coming down to practice at this point.




Anyhow, really appreciate you taking the time to shed light on this problem.  I feel like I'm starting to beat a dead horse now and just need to practice, tweak, and practice some more.  Even more so I need to get back to making full garments and let go of it trying to be completely exact and perfect, for now.....

I had a roof leaking and took the opportunity (or rather the necessity!) this week to do some (...)  cleaning up and going through boxes of old stuf... One of the finds; no less the 3 of the dreaded 1/4 scale rules that we used at college. These are in a white acethate or plastic that works like a dirt magnet for pencil lead; after a month these look like you poked the chimney with them. Any of remember these?


Cheers, Hendrick

Quote from: Schneiderfrei on October 30, 2024, 02:09:04 PMThe idea is you practice the drafts in miniature to get a feel for the process and then apply the principles to your real life measurements.

Ah, that makes sense Schneiderfrei, I thought I was going nuts. Too used to 'modern' (Edwardian) drafts! 

Edit: I think another reason it was done is because (as you point out) the diagrams are quarter scale, to ensure that they look properly proportioned. Therefore the intended size of the book's pages dictated the max measurements that could be used. Also, it's clear from those links I found, that their tape measures were quite short. So if they were practicing the system, there was only so much they could cope with.

All very confusing to the modern eye. I guess that pre-internet, people had to think for themselves and figured this one out no problem!